Projected impact of travoprost versus both timolol and latanoprost on visual field deficit progression and costs among black glaucoma subjects

Michael Halpern, David W. Covert, Alan L. Robin, M. Bruce Shields, Allan J. Flach, Robert L. Stamper

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: We compared differences associated with use of travoprost and latanoprost on both progression of perimetric loss over time and associated costs among black patients. Methods: Patients with primary open-angle glaucome or ocular hypertension were randomly assigned to one of four arms in a 12-month, double-masked study: travoprost (0.004% or 0.0015%), latanoprost (0.005%), or timolol (0.5%). Forty-nine patients received 0.004% travoprost, 43 received latanoprost, and 40 received timolol. We applied algorithms found in published studies that link intraocular pressure (IOP) control to visual field progression and calculated the likelihood of visual field deterioration based on IOP data. This was used to estimate differences in medical care costs. Results: The average IOP was lower for patients receiving travoprost than for patients receiving latanoprost or timolol (17.3 versus 18.7 versus 20.5 mm Hg respectively, P<.05). Travoprost-treated patients had a smaller predicted change in visual field defect score (VFDS) than latanoprost-treated patients and timolol-treated patients, and significantly fewer were expected to demonstrate visual field progression. Medical care costs would be higher for latanoprost-treated and timolol-treated patients. Conclusions: Recent studies have provided algorithms linking IOP control to changes in visual fields. We found that treatment with travoprost was associated with less visual field progression and potential cost savings.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)109-118
Number of pages10
JournalTransactions of the American Ophthalmological Society
Volume100
StatePublished - 2002
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

latanoprost
Timolol
Visual Fields
Glaucoma
Costs and Cost Analysis
Intraocular Pressure
Health Care Costs
Travoprost
Ocular Hypertension
Cost Savings

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology

Cite this

Projected impact of travoprost versus both timolol and latanoprost on visual field deficit progression and costs among black glaucoma subjects. / Halpern, Michael; Covert, David W.; Robin, Alan L.; Shields, M. Bruce; Flach, Allan J.; Stamper, Robert L.

In: Transactions of the American Ophthalmological Society, Vol. 100, 2002, p. 109-118.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f074d4e58602422db45935b82031d637,
title = "Projected impact of travoprost versus both timolol and latanoprost on visual field deficit progression and costs among black glaucoma subjects",
abstract = "Purpose: We compared differences associated with use of travoprost and latanoprost on both progression of perimetric loss over time and associated costs among black patients. Methods: Patients with primary open-angle glaucome or ocular hypertension were randomly assigned to one of four arms in a 12-month, double-masked study: travoprost (0.004{\%} or 0.0015{\%}), latanoprost (0.005{\%}), or timolol (0.5{\%}). Forty-nine patients received 0.004{\%} travoprost, 43 received latanoprost, and 40 received timolol. We applied algorithms found in published studies that link intraocular pressure (IOP) control to visual field progression and calculated the likelihood of visual field deterioration based on IOP data. This was used to estimate differences in medical care costs. Results: The average IOP was lower for patients receiving travoprost than for patients receiving latanoprost or timolol (17.3 versus 18.7 versus 20.5 mm Hg respectively, P<.05). Travoprost-treated patients had a smaller predicted change in visual field defect score (VFDS) than latanoprost-treated patients and timolol-treated patients, and significantly fewer were expected to demonstrate visual field progression. Medical care costs would be higher for latanoprost-treated and timolol-treated patients. Conclusions: Recent studies have provided algorithms linking IOP control to changes in visual fields. We found that treatment with travoprost was associated with less visual field progression and potential cost savings.",
author = "Michael Halpern and Covert, {David W.} and Robin, {Alan L.} and Shields, {M. Bruce} and Flach, {Allan J.} and Stamper, {Robert L.}",
year = "2002",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "100",
pages = "109--118",
journal = "Transactions of the American Ophthalmological Society",
issn = "0065-9533",
publisher = "American Ophthalmological Society",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Projected impact of travoprost versus both timolol and latanoprost on visual field deficit progression and costs among black glaucoma subjects

AU - Halpern, Michael

AU - Covert, David W.

AU - Robin, Alan L.

AU - Shields, M. Bruce

AU - Flach, Allan J.

AU - Stamper, Robert L.

PY - 2002

Y1 - 2002

N2 - Purpose: We compared differences associated with use of travoprost and latanoprost on both progression of perimetric loss over time and associated costs among black patients. Methods: Patients with primary open-angle glaucome or ocular hypertension were randomly assigned to one of four arms in a 12-month, double-masked study: travoprost (0.004% or 0.0015%), latanoprost (0.005%), or timolol (0.5%). Forty-nine patients received 0.004% travoprost, 43 received latanoprost, and 40 received timolol. We applied algorithms found in published studies that link intraocular pressure (IOP) control to visual field progression and calculated the likelihood of visual field deterioration based on IOP data. This was used to estimate differences in medical care costs. Results: The average IOP was lower for patients receiving travoprost than for patients receiving latanoprost or timolol (17.3 versus 18.7 versus 20.5 mm Hg respectively, P<.05). Travoprost-treated patients had a smaller predicted change in visual field defect score (VFDS) than latanoprost-treated patients and timolol-treated patients, and significantly fewer were expected to demonstrate visual field progression. Medical care costs would be higher for latanoprost-treated and timolol-treated patients. Conclusions: Recent studies have provided algorithms linking IOP control to changes in visual fields. We found that treatment with travoprost was associated with less visual field progression and potential cost savings.

AB - Purpose: We compared differences associated with use of travoprost and latanoprost on both progression of perimetric loss over time and associated costs among black patients. Methods: Patients with primary open-angle glaucome or ocular hypertension were randomly assigned to one of four arms in a 12-month, double-masked study: travoprost (0.004% or 0.0015%), latanoprost (0.005%), or timolol (0.5%). Forty-nine patients received 0.004% travoprost, 43 received latanoprost, and 40 received timolol. We applied algorithms found in published studies that link intraocular pressure (IOP) control to visual field progression and calculated the likelihood of visual field deterioration based on IOP data. This was used to estimate differences in medical care costs. Results: The average IOP was lower for patients receiving travoprost than for patients receiving latanoprost or timolol (17.3 versus 18.7 versus 20.5 mm Hg respectively, P<.05). Travoprost-treated patients had a smaller predicted change in visual field defect score (VFDS) than latanoprost-treated patients and timolol-treated patients, and significantly fewer were expected to demonstrate visual field progression. Medical care costs would be higher for latanoprost-treated and timolol-treated patients. Conclusions: Recent studies have provided algorithms linking IOP control to changes in visual fields. We found that treatment with travoprost was associated with less visual field progression and potential cost savings.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0042889248&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0042889248&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 100

SP - 109

EP - 118

JO - Transactions of the American Ophthalmological Society

JF - Transactions of the American Ophthalmological Society

SN - 0065-9533

ER -